I think when looking at art history there have constantly been attempts to define or structure art, or fine art. The funny aspect of that is the many great movements of art that were in rebellion to established, highly regarded, or accepted academic notions.

Dear Gordon,

Indeed, and this is why I am deeply suspicious of '-isms'. They are rebellions against, and attempts to structure, rather than an attempt to be true to a vision. The term 'impressionists' was (as far as I recall) originally an insult, while Fauves, Dadaists, Futurists and Modernists were essentially bandwagons.

Photography, since the Linked Ring and Camera Work (with its poisonous, pretentious hangers-on) has sometimes outdone painting as a source of worthless sell-righteousness.